Fewer than one in six people think that government funding for science should be cut in favour of other areas of expenditure, according to a survey published earlier this week, which offers further proof of the unpopularity of the coalition's plans to slash its investment in research.

The report on Public Attitudes to Science 2011 was published by pollsters Ipsos MORI and the British Science Association for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.

A representative sample of the UK public, surveyed between October and December 2010, were asked a range of questions about their views on science, including its role in people's lives.

A whopping 76 per cent strongly agreed or tended to agree that "even if it brings no immediate benefits, scientific research which advances knowledge should be funded by government" (see page 69 here).

And only 15 per cent agreed to some extent that "government funding for science should be cut because the money can be better spent elsewhere".

The report notes that the poll was carried out around the time that the coalition government published the results of the Comprehensive Spending Review and that "during this period, there was considerable media coverage as well as an online campaign in favour of public funding of science, which may have affected responses to these questions".

Not only is the slashing of the research budget the opposite of what the overwhelming majority of the public want, but it is also likely to damage the UK's international competitiveness. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has noted previously that UK gross expenditure on research and development as a proportion of GDP is below the average for the European Union and lower than that of many other nations with large economies.

And its latest provisional estimate is that the UK's expenditure on research and development fell from 1.87 per cent of GDP in 2009 to 1.81 per cent in 2010 (see page 25 here). With the Comprehensive Spending Review plan to significantly reduce investment in university research over the next few years, we can expect to be overtaken by most of our other economic competitors.

So is there anything that can convince the government that it should stop its attack on the UK research base, if a lack of public support and a lowly ranking in the international league table is not reason enough?